From: Charles Manning <manningc2@actrix.gen.nz>
To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: "Wolfgang Mües" <wolfgang.mues@auerswald.de>
Subject: Re: Questions about NAND (double)bit errors
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:17:04 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200602161617.04905.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200602141510.12749.wolfgang.mues@auerswald.de>
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 03:10, Wolfgang Mües wrote:
> Hello Charles,
>
> Charles Manning wrote:
> > * YAFFS is very conservative on dealing with ECC failures. YAFFS retires
> > a block if one ECC failure is seen. JFFS2, IIRC allows five of so failure
> > before retiring a block. The Toshiba folk have told me that if a block is
> > going bad, it is most likely to start displaying recoverable 1-bit errors
> > before displaying non-recoverable multi-bit errors. Thus, YAFFS will
> > potentially perform differently in this area.
>
> About bad block detection: what is your oppinion about partitioning the
> flash (the programs in a read-only partition, the data in r/w).
This gets fs specific. With YAFFS (and I assume JFFS2, but consult an expert),
grabage collection will force read-only files to get rewritten occasionally.
Thus for ultimate reliability it is probably a GoodIdea to seperate the
read-only stuff into a seperate partition. This is also a GoodIdea in that a
smaller partition mounts faster (true for YAFFS and JFFS2). So if all your
kernel + mount stuff is seperated from your rw stuff things will probably dgo
better.
>
> How about detection of ECC errors in read only partitions?
ECC should be done on both rw and read-only partitions. Sometimes NAND gets
read disturbs which would impact on read-only partitions. Also, write
disturbs from writes to one partition can still corrupt a read-only partition
on the same chip.
>
> > One important factor, IMHO, is how you handle the write protect pin on
> > the NAND. Some people tie the WP to the power supply failure flag. IMHO
> > this is a bad thing to do since it can cause incomplete writes to happen
> > if the wp is asserted during a write or erase cycle.
>
> I have checked this.
>
> WP is tied to VCC, and VCC is stable at least 500ms after a power fail
> detect.
500ms is long enough to grow a beard.
There's been some interesting discussion over in yaffs-land on this. If you
don't subscribe to yaffs list then you can catch up on the yaffs archive.
-- Charles
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-16 3:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-02 11:12 Questions about NAND (double)bit errors Wolfgang Mües
2006-02-08 22:26 ` Charles Manning
2006-02-10 8:28 ` Wolfgang Mües
2006-02-14 14:10 ` Wolfgang Mües
2006-02-16 3:17 ` Charles Manning [this message]
2006-02-16 8:30 ` Wolfgang Mües
2006-02-16 22:08 ` Jamie Lokier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200602161617.04905.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz \
--to=manningc2@actrix.gen.nz \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=wolfgang.mues@auerswald.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox